2nd home council tax

ReadySteadyPop

lincroft1710 said:

FlorayG said:

I don't think you have much of a case. While your situation is slightly different to those who have a 'holiday home', the council will say you could rent somewhere or have lodgings or stay in an AirBnB or hotel 3 nights a week while a local family could buy your property and live in it.

Agree. Is there any need to own a property where you will only stay for a maximum of 40% of the time?

Wealthy people do this all the time, with multiple properties, 40% of the time is quite a lot.

ReadySteadyPop

MobileSaver said:

Grumpy_chap said:

Redrum99 said:

Hi, I use a 2nd home which I've bought to stay at while working away 2 or 3 nights a week. I've always paid full council tax on this but I've just had my year's bill doubled with a 100% uplift for 2nd home, they now want nearly 4.3k a year. Is there anyway to reduce this as I now have to consider leaving my job and selling up as I now have a combined council tax bill of 6.5k. Feeling a bit done over at the moment. 

that means the standard CT rate for the second home is £2.15k so that is quite a high rate of CT.  That is a property some way up the banding.

Sounds a bargain to me, my standard CT (rural mid-Wales) for the coming financial year is just over £5,000!

Does the council provide value for this in your opinion?

lincroft1710

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

FlorayG said:

I don't think you have much of a case. While your situation is slightly different to those who have a 'holiday home', the council will say you could rent somewhere or have lodgings or stay in an AirBnB or hotel 3 nights a week while a local family could buy your property and live in it.

Agree. Is there any need to own a property where you will only stay for a maximum of 40% of the time?

Wealthy people do this all the time, with multiple properties, 40% of the time is quite a lot.

The OP doesn't appear to be that wealthy as they are considering selling up and leaving their job. Also I said a maximum of 40%, the usage is probably nearer 30%  which means the property is unused for considerably more time than it used. 

ReadySteadyPop

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

FlorayG said:

I don't think you have much of a case. While your situation is slightly different to those who have a 'holiday home', the council will say you could rent somewhere or have lodgings or stay in an AirBnB or hotel 3 nights a week while a local family could buy your property and live in it.

Agree. Is there any need to own a property where you will only stay for a maximum of 40% of the time?

Wealthy people do this all the time, with multiple properties, 40% of the time is quite a lot.

The OP doesn't appear to be that wealthy as they are considering selling up and leaving their job. Also I said a maximum of 40%, the usage is probably nearer 30%  which means the property is unused for considerably more time than it used. 

 To the people advocating double or more council tax to get more "locals" prioritised this would be win win, an extra house and an extra job for a local? The irony is that it was the "global village" experiment with it`s super low interest rates and super cheap goods from China that allowed loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property in the first place! Previous generations of working people didn`t have that access to credit/equity, but the reversal could be brutal as councils now treat property as a revenue gathering tool?

lincroft1710

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

FlorayG said:

I don't think you have much of a case. While your situation is slightly different to those who have a 'holiday home', the council will say you could rent somewhere or have lodgings or stay in an AirBnB or hotel 3 nights a week while a local family could buy your property and live in it.

Agree. Is there any need to own a property where you will only stay for a maximum of 40% of the time?

Wealthy people do this all the time, with multiple properties, 40% of the time is quite a lot.

The OP doesn't appear to be that wealthy as they are considering selling up and leaving their job. Also I said a maximum of 40%, the usage is probably nearer 30%  which means the property is unused for considerably more time than it used. 

 To the people advocating double or more council tax to get more "locals" prioritised this would be win win, an extra house and an extra job for a local? The irony is that it was the "global village" experiment with it`s super low interest rates and super cheap goods from China that allowed loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property in the first place! Previous generations of working people didn`t have that access to credit/equity, but the reversal could be brutal as councils now treat property as a revenue gathering tool?

What are you talking about? "Global Village Experiment?" "Loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property?"


You can rail and rant on about the second home premium until the cows come home but it is what the government wants and will thus stay until Parliament decides otherwise.

Slinky

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

FlorayG said:

I don't think you have much of a case. While your situation is slightly different to those who have a 'holiday home', the council will say you could rent somewhere or have lodgings or stay in an AirBnB or hotel 3 nights a week while a local family could buy your property and live in it.

Agree. Is there any need to own a property where you will only stay for a maximum of 40% of the time?

Wealthy people do this all the time, with multiple properties, 40% of the time is quite a lot.

The OP doesn't appear to be that wealthy as they are considering selling up and leaving their job. Also I said a maximum of 40%, the usage is probably nearer 30%  which means the property is unused for considerably more time than it used. 

 To the people advocating double or more council tax to get more "locals" prioritised this would be win win, an extra house and an extra job for a local? The irony is that it was the "global village" experiment with it`s super low interest rates and super cheap goods from China that allowed loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property in the first place! Previous generations of working people didn`t have that access to credit/equity, but the reversal could be brutal as councils now treat property as a revenue gathering tool?

What are you talking about? "Global Village Experiment?" "Loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property?"


You can rail and rant on about the second home premium until the cows come home but it is what the government wants and will thus stay until Parliament decides otherwise.

He's not railing against it, Crashy is supporting it for some reason.

ReadySteadyPop

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

FlorayG said:

I don't think you have much of a case. While your situation is slightly different to those who have a 'holiday home', the council will say you could rent somewhere or have lodgings or stay in an AirBnB or hotel 3 nights a week while a local family could buy your property and live in it.

Agree. Is there any need to own a property where you will only stay for a maximum of 40% of the time?

Wealthy people do this all the time, with multiple properties, 40% of the time is quite a lot.

The OP doesn't appear to be that wealthy as they are considering selling up and leaving their job. Also I said a maximum of 40%, the usage is probably nearer 30%  which means the property is unused for considerably more time than it used. 

 To the people advocating double or more council tax to get more "locals" prioritised this would be win win, an extra house and an extra job for a local? The irony is that it was the "global village" experiment with it`s super low interest rates and super cheap goods from China that allowed loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property in the first place! Previous generations of working people didn`t have that access to credit/equity, but the reversal could be brutal as councils now treat property as a revenue gathering tool?

What are you talking about? "Global Village Experiment?" "Loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property?"


You can rail and rant on about the second home premium until the cows come home but it is what the government wants and will thus stay until Parliament decides otherwise.

Without super cheap mortgage debt a lot of people wouldn`t have second homes, now they are in a position of much more expensive mortgage debt, higher cost of living AND double (or more if some people get their way!) council tax!

lincroft1710

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

ReadySteadyPop said:

lincroft1710 said:

FlorayG said:

I don't think you have much of a case. While your situation is slightly different to those who have a 'holiday home', the council will say you could rent somewhere or have lodgings or stay in an AirBnB or hotel 3 nights a week while a local family could buy your property and live in it.

Agree. Is there any need to own a property where you will only stay for a maximum of 40% of the time?

Wealthy people do this all the time, with multiple properties, 40% of the time is quite a lot.

The OP doesn't appear to be that wealthy as they are considering selling up and leaving their job. Also I said a maximum of 40%, the usage is probably nearer 30%  which means the property is unused for considerably more time than it used. 

 To the people advocating double or more council tax to get more "locals" prioritised this would be win win, an extra house and an extra job for a local? The irony is that it was the "global village" experiment with it`s super low interest rates and super cheap goods from China that allowed loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property in the first place! Previous generations of working people didn`t have that access to credit/equity, but the reversal could be brutal as councils now treat property as a revenue gathering tool?

What are you talking about? "Global Village Experiment?" "Loads of ordinary people to hoover up extra property?"


You can rail and rant on about the second home premium until the cows come home but it is what the government wants and will thus stay until Parliament decides otherwise.

Without super cheap mortgage debt a lot of people wouldn`t have second homes, now they are in a position of much more expensive mortgage debt, higher cost of living AND double (or more if some people get their way!) council tax!

Where's your evidence of "super cheap mortgage debt"?

artyboy

theartfullodger said:

A true patriot pays their due taxes without trying to wriggle out ....

Best wishes to all

So no ISA or personal/occupational pension for you then?

horsewithnoname

artyboy said:

theartfullodger said:

A true patriot pays their due taxes without trying to wriggle out ....

Best wishes to all

So no ISA or personal/occupational pension for you then?

They are government sanctioned accounts that are not anything like dodging tax